Allowed¶27

Sewa Singh v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Jul 2025CWP/5767/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition CWP-5767-2000 (O&M), Sewa Singh v. State of Haryana, decided 10.07.2025 by Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.: reversion of petitioner from Assistant to Steno-Typist by order dated 31.03.2000 (grounded on inter se seniority reckoned from dates of joining at Fatehabad) set aside on changed circumstances, respondent No.3 having shifted to the SAS cadre and HCS; seniority/entitlement issue left academic; status quo ante reversion retained; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 31.03.2000 reverting the petitioner from Assistant to Steno-Typist set aside, retaining the status as it existed prior to the reversion; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of. ¶27

Sewa Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the condition No.3 of the promotion order dated 19.02.1999 and the order dated 31.03.2000 reverting the petitioner from Assistant to Steno-Typist ought to be set aside. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

In view of the changed circumstances — respondent No.3 having switched his channel of promotion into the SAS cadre and later the HCS, leaving no surviving inter se dispute — the Court found the determination of seniority and the petitioner's entitlement academic and deemed it appropriate to retain the status as it existed prior to the order of reversion.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

Consequently, the impugned order (reversion of the petitioner dated 31.03.2000) is set aside taking into consideration the changed circumstances.

¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court, CWP-5767-2000 (O&M), decided 10.07.2025 (Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J., Oral): Sewa Singh, a Steno-Typist transferred to District Fatehabad upon its carving out of Hisar, was promoted Assistant on 19.02.1999 as respondent No.3 lacked the requisite 3 years' experience; by the impugned order dated 31.03.2000 the petitioner was reverted to Steno-Typist on the ground that respondent No.3, held senior inter se from the respective dates of joining at Fatehabad, had meanwhile acquired the experience. Operation of the reversion order was stayed on notice of motion issued on 17.05.2000, and the petitioner continued as Assistant earning further promotions, while respondent No.3 switched to the SAS cadre and was ultimately nominated to the Haryana Civil Services. With no surviving inter se contest, the Court found the seniority and entitlement questions academic and, in the changed circumstances, set aside the impugned order retaining the pre-reversion status; the petition was allowed and pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

204

¶3

CWP-5767-2000 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.07.2025

SEWA SINGH

......Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

¶8

.......Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

¶10

¶11

Present: - Mr. Ravi Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Rahul Dev, Addl. A.G. Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Tarun Yadav, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶14

¶15

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶16

The present writ petition has been filed seeking setting aside of the condition No.3 of the promotion order dated 19.02.1999 and the order dated 31.03.2000 vide which the petitioner had been reverted from the post of an Assistant to Steno-Typist.

¶17

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that consequent upon carving out of District Fatehabad from the erstwhile District Hisar and options having been sought, the petitioner, who was then working as Steno Typist in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa w.e.f.

¶18

29.09.1995, opted for his appointment by way of transfer in District

¶19

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.07.15 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CWP-5767-2000 (O&M) -2-

¶21

Fatehabad whereupon he was appointed as the Steno Typist in Fatehabad on 09.10.1997. The private respondent No.3 was earlier working in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal, had also been appointed by way of transfer in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad on 01.10.1997. As per the erstwhile Service Rules, for promotion to the post of Assistant from amongst Clerks/ Steno-typists, an experience of 03 years was required to be possessed. Since respondent No.3 did not possess the requisite experience of 03 years as Clerk, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant on 19.02.1999. Later, vide the impugned order, the respondents ordered promotion of the private respondent No.3 who also acquired the experience in the meanwhile, to the above post of Assistant by directing reversion of the petitioner on the ground that respondent No.3 is senior to the petitioner as inter-se seniority was to be determined from the date of their respective joining in Fatehabad.

¶22

At the time of filing of the instant writ petition, while issuing notice of motion on 17.05.2000, operation of the impugned order dated 31.03.2000 was ordered to be stayed. The petitioner thus continued to work against the substantive post of Assistant and has thereafter also earned subsequent promotions. It is also undisputed that the respondent No.3 thereafter switched the line of his promotion and eventually moved forward into the SAS cadre from where he was finally nominated into the Haryana Civil Services. Hence, he switched the channel of promotion and has no more competing or contesting interest or claim with the petitioner.

¶23

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.07.15 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

CWP-5767-2000 (O&M) -3-

¶25

Taking into consideration the change in circumstances and noticing that now no inter se dispute of seniority and promotion exists between the petitioner and the private respondent, the determination of seniority and the issue as regards entitlement of the petitioner may only be academic having no final impact on the inter se claim of the parties or affect any other person, I hence, deem it appropriate and in fitness of things to retain the status as it existed prior to the order of reversion of the petitioner

¶26

in such changed circumstances. Consequently, the impugned order herein is set aside taking into consideration the changed circumstances.

¶27

The petition is allowed accordingly.

¶28

All the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, are also

¶29

disposed of.

¶30

JULY 10, 2025	(VI	NOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE
Vishal Sharma
	Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	: Yes/No

¶31

VISHAL SHARMA 2025.07.15 15:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sewa Singh v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sewa Singh v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramjit Kaur Vs Union of India and Others

Right Guard Workers Union & Anr. Vs Presiding Officer Industrial Trib. Punjab and Ors.

Vaseem Akram Vs State of Haryana and Others

Kavita Devi Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jai Bhagwan Vs State of Haryana and Others

Sona Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.